another whispery Batman who can never kill anyone no matter how evil and murderous they are. Batman is a joke. He's a cartoon. He couldn't kill Hitler. The whole world could be at stake, and he would risk not killing someone so he could simply arrest them. Yeah, yeah, due process and all that. Hey, its a fantasy world. If the bad dudes are going to constantly escape an such to threaten and harm people, then lets see someone get put down. The way Batman is written now, if he actually did the decent thing and killed one of these nut jobs, he's probably spend an entire film dealing with therapists and moaning about his "failure" as a hero. In the last film, the Joker was actually kinda right with the little speech he gave Batman near the end of the film. They need each other to thrive. Its pathetic and teaches some of the worst kind of crap to kids. Real hated the way that film ended.
Bring back Darkman or the Punisher.

Which is too fucking long. I sincerely wish we could get at least one superhero franchise on TV so this shit wouldn't happen. Why can't we have 26 44-minute episodes of, say, The Flash or Martian Manhunter or something every year? It would totally work now, it just needs a bigger budget than it's gotten in the past.

i mean seriously. you're going to fucking blow up the font and strap a bold on that fucker and then get the goddamned date wrong? you should be ashamed. there are few things that we expect from you beaks, outside of copy and pasting other peoples' scoops and not fallin asleep during the work day and you fuck up this? clownish.

Evil Dead 4 is coming out this Halloween, The Hobbit will be released this Christmas, and the title of "Editor" will be edited from everyone's name in the contact section of this site by Thanksgiving... 2012. ;)

...I never really read his articles, but in two days he made two of the most memorable articles ever! his next article should be that video of Harry gettin bukaked by EVERY hellywood exec he has ever met

And Ridley Scott will finish his water park epic in time for Saint Patrick's Day. The Alien Prequels have already come out. He forgot to tell you. Riding water slides tends to make him absent minded like that. The producers were going to say something, but he pulled them in on slide action too. Everyone is very pruned. And British. Except for Napoleon. He's just ice cream.

Dark Knight may have been deeply flawed with its Harvey Dent sub-plot and anticlimactic resolution to the Joker. However, based on its massive strengths and Oscar win, it is immensely popular and rightly so. To make a third movie in the series for the sake of making it a trilogy would be a serious mistake. <p>
<p>
While not a strict rule, it is already well known that third movies rarely surpass their predecessors. Jedi failed to better Empire. X3 fell short of the watermark established by X2. Superman 3 was a skid mark compared to 1&2. Godfather 3 is notoriously inconsistent compared to 2. Spider-Man 3 packs in 99% more emo song and dance moments than either of the previous Spider-Man films. Batman Forever helped undo much of Tim Burton's work to distance Batman from the 60s era camp. Terminator 3 was so bad that the TV show retconned it and 4 happily forgot it.<p>
<p>
Basically, 3rd movies in a series don't do well. Yeah. Occasionally you'll get a Back to the Future 3, Dream Warriors (NoES3), or RotK which breathes something new or visually different into the series. <p>
<p>
However, for the most part, third movies are the movies where you can see the creators trying struggling to find new idea. Usually, the first movie tends to be the "beta" - an incomplete test version - of the final product. Often, it is a proof of concept. Usually a magnificent one, if it warrants a sequel, but a proof of concept just the same. Its the second movie where the creators try to better the original in every way, fixing problems of the original and building more depth into their original designs. The second movie, with its higher budget, is usually the one where they get to do everything that they couldn't do in the first. Once you reach the 3rd movie, it's all just a cash grab. You've already made your perfect sequel. Now, you're fighting budgets and struggling to find new realms to explore. The 3rd movie is usually the dumping ground. Its the experiment gone wrong. The failed effort to be even bigger and better. Its that self indulgent excess that kills most 3rd movies.<p>
<p>
Do I think Batman 3 could be good? Sure. Bad 3rd movies aren't an immutable law of physics or anything. However, it is rather likely that we end up with another Beverly Hills Cop 3, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Halloween 3 Season of the Witch, or PotC At World's End. Worse yet, we could end up with another Die Hard 4 or Ghostbusters 2.<p>
<p>
Nolan and WB should leave well enough alone. There's villain for this series that could ever make us forget about Heath Ledger's Joker. Even if one comes along, that actor is going to have to fight to be remembered when the last guy was an Oscar winning dead guy. Plus, what great bad Batman guys are we left with now? Wanna go down the Catwoman route? Dangerous to do, especially when the last 2 were the sultry Pfeifer and the craptacular Berry. Penguin? First off, how does this character fit in Nolan's vision of the Batworld? Second, even if you could take this character past the silly renditions of DeVito & Meredith, is Penguin REALLY that much of a threat? More so than Joker? Should we just go back to Two-Face? I wouldn't. Visually, he was great. Creatively, he's already been botched at the character level and Eckhart is like dry toast in TDK. Who's left? The walking Jeopardy question known as Riddler? Joker lover Harley? Green thumb Poison Ivy? Walking pile of shit Clayface? Personality-less Killer Croc, Toyman, Mr. Freeze, or Red Hood?<p>
<p>
Batman's arch nemesis is Joker. Heath Ledger set the gold standard for this character.... and now he's dead. Batman + Joker = PB&J. There's nowhere to go, but down with this series. Nobody in this decade will ever try to take up the character again. The B-level characters that they can spin gold from in the comics will just make for boring and uninspired movie fodder.<p>
<p>
I understand wanting to fulfill contracts and make a sequel to one of one of the most loved superhero franchises of all time. However, seeing as how we've already seen the top of the mountain, where else is there to go? There may be lots of money to be made, but some sequels shouldn't be made. It's not like WB's going to lose the rights or anything. It's their property. Just let the series end on a high note. Wait 10 or 15 years. Let the next breed of directors, writers, and actors put their own unique stamps on the series.<p>
<p>
Right now, I'm tempted to scream "too soon" as I would with the Spidey reboot. Ah, what the hell. TOO SOON! ;-)

Cameron said that yesterday in the Ohio university where he was invited.so Nolan shouldnt worry about that.What he should worry about is that Ledger is dead and without him ( and the over-exposure) he should do his best to repeat or at least reach the success of TDK.<br /><p>Mr Nolan this it: either you prove you are one of the best and can bring us a real masterpiece this time or just a lucky dude who indirectly gained from Ledger's death.

I think that the "deeply flawed" elements of TDK are overwhelmingly outnumbered by those elements of brilliance, Ledger's performance being the standout element on that list. I don't mean to say that the movie, as whole is deeply flawed. I just mean to say that TDK has some problems that weigh it down, especially on repeat viewings. Not a perfect superhero movie at all, but certainly among the best.

We need more A list directors resisting the putrid visual stench that is 3D. It works with a very small number of films that are purely about the visuals (i.e animations) but for something like Batman 3D will suck hard. Its an eyesore, a distraction from the story. Nolan is smart as fuck, he knows this and there's more chance of finding a virgin in a whorehouse than him bowing to 3D.

Yup, Tuesday, July 20, 2010. Yeah, you read correctly. The third Batman film will open on a Tuesday.
And expect it to hit DVD and Blu Ray on Tuesday, November 30, 2010. So you can watch it at home before this year is out. Don't forget to ask for it as a gift this Christmas, boys and girls!

I agree that it shouldn't be 3D, know that Nolan is against 3D, and hope that he somehow gets his way. ... Oh wait, that WAS serious. Um... yeah... whores on a water slide... with ice cream... DISCUSS!

I want the Penguin. <P>
Nolan, rescue one of Batman's greatest foes from obscurity and bad characterization that have over taken him the last two-and-a-half decades. The guy is an incredible villain with incredible potential. <P>
I want the mother-fucking Penguin!

My money is still on Riddler and Bane. Bane is obvious as I've said before because he is the only villain that would make fans fear that Nolan would end his trilogy with Batman dying. The Riddler for another talkbacker's point from early on: he would be a super hacker. Batman's Sonar from the last film is a perfect shoe-in to have Riddler after him. TDK showed the consequences of wearing a mask, Gotham City could show the consequences of Batman's power.

They might be able to write a sold film with Reaper, but fans would likely scratch their heads at the choice and honestly, most of the themes were already explored in TDK. The Penguin I think Nolan went on record as saying he wasn't interested in. If I'm wrong or he's changed his mind... yeah, maybe. I'm not sure how introducing him as the last villain of this story arc would make sense though. Oh, and THE MONK is out. No fantasy villains, he has been concrete about that, even though it would be interesting to end with the original baddie. Red Hood is also unlikely in any form what with the Red Hood cartoon movie. Mad Hatter also seemed a little too far fetched. *shrugs*

until now we have gotten lunatic villains in the batman movie.can we get a villain who justs wants to avenge his beloved dead wife?<br />thats a worthy concept for a realistic,mature universe right?<br /><p>have Rutger's character from the first one to return in the sequel.He is the representer of a newly arrived in GC company which is the main antagonist of Bruce's company.The CEO of the company is Talia As Ghul who has sworn to her father to avenge him by destroying Wayne's company and then GCity and he asks Rutger's help who also has a grudge with Wayne and especially with Luscius Fox.But eventually she falls in love with Bruce (she knows that he is the batman)<br /><P>Meanwhile someone is stealing cryogenic hi-tech from Talia's company.Rutger using the help from the new underworld boss (Black Mask who came to fill the void that the,now imprisoned,mafia left) catches the man behind those thefts and meets him.Ofc he is Mr Freeze who used to be a brilliant scientist who was working in a cryogenic project years ago in Wayne's company.But a terrible accident in the labs kills his wife and after that he vanishes.Now he returned in GC in order to avenge his wife's death by killing Wayne who considers him responsible for the accident.He needed the hitech in order to upgrade his suit and make weapons to kill Wayne.<br /><p>Now here is the catch.The real responsible for the accident was Rugter himself.Freeze does not know that.So Rugter manipulates Freeze and tells him that he will give him all the tech he needs,provided that he kills Wayne,Luscius and destroys his company.Freeze agrees.<br /><p>Talia and Wayne fall in love with Talia torn between her promise to her father and her love to Wayne.She also does not know about Rutger plans.Then in a social party where Talia,Wayne and Fox attend,Freeze appears and tries to kill Wayne and Luscius while putting Talia into danger.Wayne as Bats manages to stop Freeze,but he manages kill Fox before escaping.Bats is devastated and tries to find who Freeze is.He finds out that the armour's tech is from Talia company so he thinks that Talia was lying that she loved him and that she sent Freeze to kill them.he goes after her and the rest on the cinema...

I have written a screenplay for the sequel to "The Dark Knight" called "Batman: Revelations". The opening scene is Coleman Reese, now living in Metropolis under an assumed name and working at LuthorCorp, coming home and being ambushed by the Riddler. (Don't worry. Superman is never seen or mentioned.) The problem is I don't know anyone in the filmmaking business. What should I do with this script? (Shoving it up a body orifice has already been considered.)

Use it as a writing sample. WB obviously won't even look at it because they are using Nolan's script and don't want to get sued, but a lot of people use their versions of the Spider-Man movies as writing samples to get a job.

The Black Mask. He would fit perfectly into this universe Nolan has created and in my opinion I think Jude Law would be the perfect Black Mask. If you doubt me just look at his role in Road To Perdition and he can play one crazy son of a bitch, which is what the role would require.

If you don't live in LA. 95% of the way you are going to get work here is not so much how good of script you have written but how good you are at pitching. <P>
But I would recommend writing something original, submitting it into festivals and then getting that to give you some "cred." After that, you've got an original script and an example of a super-hero script (the hot genre right now and for the next couple of years) for you to show potential manager (get a manager, not an agent if you are a writer).

Pinguin got this close to be a character in THE DARK KNIGHT. It was eventually cut out because the Nolans though the movie had too many characters already. Pinguin in the 3rd Batman movie is, thus, not entirely out of teh question. And the nolans could go places with him. Just look at what they did with The Joker.

Did you know that Goyer himself said that his script for BATMAN BEGINS was heavily re-writen by Christopher Nolan himself, so much so that all that remained from Goyer's work was the basic premise and the characters list for the story. And according to Goyer, Nolan's re-writes improved the script immensely.

I agree the film is flawed, but the improbability of the Joker works for me. It's the point to some extent. He's almost super human in how he can constantly organize impossible feats and pull them off. Bruce has seemingly unlimited resources at his disposal to do the nearly impossible, and like the god-like Superman against Lex, meets his match against a mortal that has his own improbable power to make things happen. Ultimately, like Anton Chigurh he gets blindsided when his seemingly magical ability to win fails. He's just lucky. He lives in anarchy and eventually it turns on him. Nothing either does is probably, but they keep building off of each other. In most films that would annoy the hell out of me, and there are moments when it tests me in TDK, but I feel like that's the point, not some error where Nolan thought we were dumb enough to think someone could organize any of the number of things these two effortlessly do.

I want 3 to back off with the toy line super gadgets and convent 'I'm rich bitches' problem-solving. Batman is a fugitive this time out, he needs to keep a lower profile than normal. Again, why I suggest Bane. The last film felt like the next should have at some level of its plot, a very real hunt for Batman, by both crime and law.

Christ, they were running low on imagination juice when they came up with that guy...a pumped-up Mexican wrestler, wow. Shoulda gave him a midget sidekick...<p>
Gail Simone managed to breathe some life into the character in SECRET SIX, but other than gay muscle worship, the continuing allure loses me...

I mean we probably (meh, make it definitely) won't see a ten year old jumping from roof to roof in tights, but what about Dick Grayson being in the movie? Could the film end with Bruce on his way to the Circus? Something has to be Batman's "light at the end of the tunnel" or 'Redemption' after TDK, don't you think (or is it better to have everyone continue to assume he's a murderer)? And what about Joseph Gordon Levitt as the Joker this time around? I don't think that last one is very likely, but who knows?

Short answer: yes. Long answer: Fuck yes. <p>
Actually, I think making it as a director outside of LA than inside. It is almost the opposite of being a screenwriter. <P>
You want to be paid as a screenwriter you need someone to buy your script and then make it into a movie. Problem is who wants to take a chance on an unknown commodity? <P>
You want to make it as a director, just go out and shoot and direct something. Now producers and executives have tangible proof what you can make and what they can get out of you.

that brought about Doomsday. Both are very powerful characters, and that is really the only thing about them that stands out (okay, Bane was kinda sneaky and could talk, but still...). Both were introduced to bring about the demise or downfall of their opponents, and then were tossed aside (with the exception of the Gail Simone's Secret Six, like BurnHollywood mentioned). It's not that they HAVE to be uninteresting, one-note, characters, it's just that practically nothing has been done to develop them further. I mean outside of getting to beat the shit out of Batman, can you think of one reason a guy like Javier Bardem would want to be Bane? Something you could show him and say, "See here, and here, and here, this is a great character." I can't think of anything.

Just because I think it's one of the most likely choices, dosen't mean I really have a hard-on for Bane. There just strikes me as a lot of logical reasons for him to be a part of the mix. As for why I think Bardem would be interested, just look at the wiki bio and tell me from there why he wouldn't be? "Bane was born in the fictional Caribbean Republic of Santa Prisca, in a prison called Peña Duro ("Hard Rock"). His father had been a revolutionary and had escaped Santa Prisca's court system. The corrupt government however decreed that his young son would serve out the man's life sentence, and thus Bane's childhood and early adult life are spent in the amoral penitentiary environment.[3][4] Though imprisoned, his natural abilities allow him to develop extraordinary skills within the prison's walls. He reads as many books as he can get his hands on, builds up his body in the prison's gym, and learns to fight in the merciless school of prison life. Despite his circumstances, he finds teachers of various sorts during his incarceration, ranging from hardened convicts to an elderly Jesuit priest, under whose tutelage he apparently receives a classical education. Bane murders this priest upon his return to Santa Prisca years later. However, he commits his first murder at the age of eight, stabbing a criminal who wanted to use him to gain information about the prison.[4] During his years in prison, Bane carries a teddy bear he calls Osito (Spanish for "little bear"), whom he considers his only friend.[5] It is revealed that Osito has a hole in his back to hold a knife that Bane uses against anyone who bullies him..." and so on and so on. Now, again, consider what they did with the Joker and think again about that background sketch (and the rest of it I didn't paste. You've got this guy that has a history being both very bad and sometimes good, who is a beast of a fighter and very intelligent but has a steroid problem, has an addiction to power and the means to keep it beyond his physical limits (something that, not to sound too Iron Man 2-ish, Batman might be grappling with himself at this point) and meanwhile both the mob and the city after Batman. You can't tell me there isn't any potential there for an interesting final chapter to this particular world of Batman.

years ago on a talkback someone floated "Hunt The Dark Knight" as a good and fitting subtitle for the third installment. and i still agree. but i bet they will not incorporate the phrase 'dark knight' this time to avoid confusion.<P>also this is the best talkback i've read since WalterB showed up, thanks for the humorous ha-has everyone.

Is that Nolan and his non-jailbird screen writing brother have both been playing the hell out of the Arkham Asylum game....cause thats the Batman movie I want to see on the big screen. And if they DO bring Bane to the big-screen,they damn well better cast Enrique Arce Temple...and Teddy Ruxpin for Osito!!!

i knew something was wrong when he posted that link to his 'review' of texas chainsaw massacre remake in his review of nightmare on elm street remake... we love ya beaks. it's like peter gabriel said to kate bush: don't give up.

You mention Bane's back story (and it's not a bad one). I just remember reading Knightfall, and thinking (at the time) I was seeing the possible beginnings of a character who could become a real problem for Batman, and then...well, that didn't really happen, at all. When it comes to what Nolan and Co. could do with the character? Sure, the possibilities are endless. And as for the whole Javier Bardem issue, I can't fault you at all for casting a movie in your head when I've done the same a million times. And I'm sure Nolan as director would pique his interest. As for Levitt as Joker? I'm not against it or anything, but I think Nolan might hesitate to reuse the character out of respect for Ledger.

Here’s the set-up…
Not only is Batman on the run but so is Bruce. The name of Wayne is destroyed. The company/organization is mired in financial scandal. Bruce himself disappears mysteriously from the public.
Crime increases on a massive scale as the economic toll of the current economic crisis takes full hold of Gotham.
Another son of Gotham comes to power with hopes of reviving it.
The police engage all manner of ‘unique’ individuals to track down the enigmatic Dark Knight and discover the whereabouts of the now missing Bruce Wayne.
No longer able to call upon the Batman for assistance, Gordon engages new ‘heroes’ to save the city and find Bruce.
As the city descends into chaos once more, Bruce Wayne must decide how to battle for its soul once more, this time without the resources he’s come to rely upon.
The question is no longer WHO is the BATMAN but WHAT is the BATMAN:
Man, Myth, or Both.
7-20-2010 (ha!)

thrown in as the love interest. (She would work in the Nolan Bat universe.) I'm sure DC Entertainment is going to reveal a lot more at the SDCC. Nolan needs to tell Warner Bros. NO BATMAN 3 in 3D!!!!<p>As for a JLA movie, it all depends if they can get Superman right. No need for solo movies to introduce Wonder Woman, The Flash, Martain Manhunter, etc. Let the JLA movie do that.<p>Batman 3>The Avengers movie in 2012.

Keep in mind this is off the top of my head and I'm recalling from months back, and the costumes are fairly complex and detailed. I'll start off by saying their costumes are a little less traditional to their individual backgrounds than the comic. Where as Fandral was dressed straight up Errol FLynn, Hogun straight up Mongol, and Volstagg was....I dont really know what Volstagg was supposed to be. But their costumes are less traditional and more in the rubber future armor motif of the rest of the Asgardian crew. Their color schemes are dark blue for Hogun, whose armor has an almost samurai hint to it but there are no hanging cloths or leather like the comic. I didn't see a mongul helmet either as he had pulled back kind of samurai looking hair, nor does he have facial hair.<P> A dark greenish blue (if I recall correctly, but it's some kind of blue hue) for Fandral, who also has a cape and long, not short, sleeves. His hair is blonde like the comic and he also has the classic swashbuckler facial hair.<P> Volstagg is a taller Ray Stevenson complete with fake fat suit and long ginger hair and beard, he looks pretty awesome. His suit is a maroonish red and it looks a little more like armor than the other two.<P>Sif has a bright red corset like top and long black hair. The costume is a bit less skimpy than I think it is usually in the comics, she has bare arms but her midriff is not exposed nor is any part of her leg.

<P>
What, who, when, 2012? That can't be right. Must be a typo.
</P>
<P>
They haven't even wrote the fucking thing yet. It takes a long time to make a good movie. Especially one with brains. This ain't a Michael Bay project.
</P>
<P>
The release date sounds perfect to me. He also has to work out how he wants to film the fucker. All IMAX or not. Nolan is not a 3D fan so I'm not sure how this will work out.
</P>

i'm not putting up with a supposedly dark hero that doesn't kill villains who just escape over and over just to harm more people and then get thrown into an insane asylum just to escape and kill more and more people while batman upholds his moral code of not killing. fuck that. dead criminals don't become repeat offenders.

Or is that too true to a comic-book for Nolan's liking?
And why'd he have to be the bad guy again? I'm still fuzzy on that. So the city of Gotham, a city strong enough not to turn on each other and blow each other outta the water when the clock's ticking, the city of Gotham would be thrown into chaos if they knew what Dent had become? The things he did? Gordon and Bats couldn't have just...explained it to everyone? I know that's not as exciting as Batman riding off into the night a fugitive, but the more I think about it, the more I wonder. So could someone please explain it to me, without repeating any of Jim Gordon's final monologue? Thanks.

and YES to Joseph Gordon Levitt as the Jokester.
I say have a bad-ass Ninja robin that Batman has to tame, sorta like Hit-girl- an actual KID like in the funny pages.
OR
You bring in Nolanverse Superman who works for the gov't to take down Batman. This would be the best.

One need only watch "Batman Forever" or "Batman and Robin" to remember that casting big names as villains doesn't necessarily guarantee quality. We want good ACTORS and not necessarily A-list stars. I'd rather see Michael Shannon or Nick Stahl, for example, than some $20 million pretty-boy.

"So could someone please explain it to me, without repeating any of Jim Gordon's final monologue?"<p>
Easily done: the screenplay sucked. But Nolan approximated a Michael Mann-like level of technical gravitas while simultaneously leaning on plot elements borrowed from David Fincher's SEVEN, which caused the less discerning to think this confusing mess was actually a masterpiece.<p>
Truth is, Nolan doesn't even understand the basics of the Batman mythos. Bruce Wayne doesn't give a shit whether the people of Gotham have a "white knight" or not...both he and James Gordon know that the people of Gotham are a bunch of indifferent assholes. Wayne is honoring his parents' memory by fighting crime, and it's Gordon's job to do so. The notion of Batman turning himself into a fugitive just to protect the reputation of a DA who lost his marbles is patently ridiculous. Melodramatic, but ridiculous.

that's you're interpretation of the batman mythos which is not static, but malleable and fluctuates with each decade. it is also not above being improved. which nolan did.<p>wayne is still honoring his parents memory by fighting crime, but in the movie...unlike the comics...he actually seeks to fight the cause of gotham's disease and not just it's symptoms. turning himself into a fugitive was a part of this.<p>if gotham finds out that the man who put so much of the criminal element away turned out to be a crazed killer himself, then it sinks deeper into cynicism and apathy. in nolan's interpretation of the mythos, the fact that gotham's citizens are "indifferent assholes" can be changed and is directly linked to the social and economic welfare of the city and the effectiveness of leaders like harvey dent.

as a villain. I seriously hope that they do not use him.
I would rather see Mad Hatter use some mind control.
Or even better, a properly realized version of Bane and have it build from the concepts of the Knightfall storyline.

He releases all of the inmates of Arkham and lets them wear Batman out. After Batman cleans up Banes mess and is completely worn out, that's when Bane takes his cheap shot and breaks Batman. He would make a terrible villian.

That would be a great tribute to Heath Ledger and the character. Him ruling Gotham from a prison cell in Arkham Asylum. A la Clarice and Hannibal in Silence of the Lambs.
By the way I am not the agent of Waltz, I just think he rocks in Basterds!

aaaarrrgghh thats so lame!!! its basicly rubber!!! aaaa rabble rabble !!! his voice!! aarrrgghhh whats with the voice!!! why did he take the blame for dent!!! arr its so lame rabble rabble rabble!!!! the jokers henchmen ?? aarrgghh

"......which caused the less discerning to think this confusing mess was actually a masterpiece." Because, you're some prophet who knows better than the rest of the movie-going public who kept that film in the # 1 spot all summer and pumped a billion dollars into it!

i remember back when the 89 Batman was a huge hit, the Enquirer had an article claiming Savage would be playing Robin the sequel. they also listed Madonna as Catwoman and in a rare moment of good thinking, DeVito as Penguin.

The Ridder = As a child, his daddy beat him whenever he told a lie, so as an adult he cannot tell lies. So he weaves these complicated riddles instead, so that he can obfuscate without telling any lies.<p>
Make him pathologically devoted to order and reason - i.e. the polar opposite of The Joker.<p>
If necessary, bring back The Joker and make them intractable enemies.<p>
Like, The Joker and The Riddler are at war and Batman is stuck in the middle.<p>
But, better yet, keep The Joker out of it.

it jus wont work, i mean how awkward would it be for a woman wearing some catwoman unitard from the braodway show CATS and then she will be like i wear this to scare people and create fear so i can steal their shit NOT!!!!!

Tut could try to take over Hostess Industries in order to have all of the cupcakes, twinkies and ho-ho's for himself. Have one scene where he sneaks into the Batcave dressed as a mailman just for shits and giggles. Jerry Seinfeld can play Batman in a dream sequence, and the greatest line of dialogue in film history will be uttered:
King Tut: HELLO, BATMAN!
Bat-Seinfeld: HELLO, TUT!

Hey man, sorry for sounding random as fuck above. I didn't notice the talkbacker that you were replying to and thought you were just spouting random shit about wanting to see the 2012 end of the world from a jacuzzi full of dolphins. Also, my apologies to said talkbacker of the jacuzzi dolphin reporting persuasion for not noticing who you were the first run through. You provide a very respectable service in informing all jacuzzi users of the dangers of serial rapist dolphins disrupting their spring break make-outs... that is, unless you're ex-The Real World staff, in which case you deprived a generation of couch potatoes the joy of seeing those obnoxious fucks get what we all wanted for them, and should be ashamed of yourself. So... yeah... cheers!

Damn it! lol It's bugging me that so many people are making a big deal out of this being Batman 8, or 9 or yadda yadda yadda. It's only called Batman 3 up above because they don't have a Batman:"......" title yet. When they do, that's what it will be called. Just like every other Batman film that's followed Burton's since 1989. I mean really, do you call the latest Bond movie by it's number?

Oh, fuck you back, n00b. If box office were a measure of quality, than SHREK 2, TRANSFORMERS 2 and THE PHANTOM MENACE were all masterpieces that dwarfed CITIZEN KANE, THE GODFATHER and THE THIRD MAN. Next!

"if gotham finds out that the man who put so much of the criminal element away turned out to be a crazed killer himself, then it sinks deeper into cynicism and apathy. in nolan's interpretation of the mythos, the fact that gotham's citizens are "indifferent assholes" can be changed and is directly linked to the social and economic welfare of the city and the effectiveness of leaders like harvey dent."<p>
Leaving aside what a "great" DA Dent was (then WTF was Boss Maroni still doing out on the street, and what the hell use was he against the Joker?!), that's a nice, soothing sentiment that still doesn't answer the glaring question of why Batman would "take credit" for someone else's murders and effectively destroy his own reputation, so Gotham's citizens can live with a comforting lie. Since when do Batman and Gordon stand for conspiracy and coverups? Is that what Nolan considers "heroic"...bullshitting the people with falsities and propaganda? And now that Gotham no longer has its "white knight" DA, doesn't it need Batman more than ever to fill the crimebusting vacuum until someone similar can continue Dent's original crusade?<p>
Questions like that aren't due to a stylistic choice, they're due to a confusing, cluttered screenplay that can't figure out WTF point it's trying to make. Hope they do better next time, but like my gripes with STAR TREK, I don't hold out hope since it's effectively the same writing crew.

There's really 4 versions of Batman movies. The Adam West version, the Tim Burton movies, the Joel Schumacher abominations, and now Nolan's. The Schumacher movies don't exist in the same universe as Burton's despite the studio never calling them a reboot. Somewhere Michael Keaton Batman is making sweet love to Michele Pfiefer Catwoman.

I agree with thatfilmlover. Joker was planned to be a big part of the third film, and given that the movie is coming out in 2012, that gives people some time to get over Heath Ledger and adjust to a new actor playing the role, most likely Joseph Gordon Levitt. I think they absolutely should re-cast and tell the story that they wanted to originally.

they made Dent like he was Jesus or something,its like without him GC was doomed to annihilation.and the writers threw that in the last part of the 3rd act,just to make Bats the tragic hero who sacrifices himself for the greater benefit,taking the blame for something that he didnt do:murder.Thus the Dark Knight title.
<p>its like ST.the writer throw things,cool things to please the idiotic fans but these things when connected they dont make a solid story which makes sense.
<p>i said it before,i will say it again: TDK could tell the exact same story in half the time,but they threw so much irrelevant stuff that the story turned into a good-looking but over-tasted salad.

He collects the hats of the 12 jurors who convicted him. He wants Batman's cowl as the crowning achievement of his collection. When Batman tries to get his cowl back, Hatter-Stiller yells "HOW DARE YOU TOUCH MY COLLECTIBLE!".

I understand that it's inevitable, but Batman does NOT need 3D. I'm sure it'll have it, but dammit I'm not going to like it!
Understand, I love 3D; Avatar was great, but it doesn't need to be used in every single movie.
Please no 3D. Please? I'll be really, really good this year!

Well said. Everything that could have been done with Batman has been done. But, as along as there's money to be bled from this tired old pulp character we'll be getting an neverending stream of shit movies and retread comics. If only Batman would go the way of the Shadow.

Don't be too shocked if Nolan does re-cast the Joker. Everything they did for TDK was with the idea of bringing the character back for part 3. Nolan is a good enough director that I don't think he relies on any one actor to tell his story. I may be wrong and we may see Catwoman or Riddler or someone else, but I for one would like to see the story told and finished, and I think Nolan would like to complete his trilogy as he originally intended. I agree with you on 3-D though, I don't see Nolan going along with it and I really don't want it to happen.

I just hope this one avoids the third movie syndrome that seems to infect all comic book movies. Throw a bunch of shit against the wall and hope something sticks. Hopefully Nolan has seen Spiderman 3 and XMen 3 and the studio is letting him have creative control of this.

You are wrong. Bruce Wayne DOES care about Gotham. He fights crimes as Batman. He does that to honor his parents memory. However, I have no idea how you can read Batman comics and not realize Bruce Wayne cares about Gotham. That is the whole point of the Wayne Foundation.

Anyone they cast is going to be stuck in Ledger's shadow and it's only going to throw the whole film off balance. Gordon-Levitt, while a decent enough actor, is an especially bad choice. The kid's noticeably younger than Ledger and the film's going to be set a while after the first one. Bats has already faced off against him and while a shadowy cameo would be fine I'd like to see Nolan fry some other fish. It's not as if there are no other interesting characters in the Batverse after all.

You must have missed my later post, because you didn't address a single point in it...when the hell did Batman's "duty" become conning the citizens of Gotham into believing a soothing lie? The comic book Batman looks upon Two-Face as a tragic victim of mental illness, but he's not about to sacrifice his reputation pretending Dent's the same man he was before.<p>
Nolan's message that people need to believe in some bullshit, idealized hero before they'll get their shit together and give a damn about their city is laughable at best, and quasi-fascistic at worst. And anyway, the last I checked, the hero of Gotham City is BATMAN not Harvey Dent! Since when does he go around trying to hide from his own achievements fighting crime?

ships scene,all the people,citizens and criminals, decided not to kill each other staying true to their real humanity.
<p>So this scene not only disproves Joker's belief that people when stranded in difficult situation,they lose their civilized ways and act without logic and ethos,but also proves clearly that the citizens of GC dont need some savior to save them,they can look after themselves and their society perfectly fine.
<p>Now why on earth Batman and Gordon thought that a whole city would fall into chaos,if its citizens learn that their beloved district attorney killed some people for revenge after being burned alive and losing his future wife,only Nolan and his brother know.
<p>mark my words the new Superman movie will be even worse that SR,if Nolan and his bro are going to write and direct the film.But the fans will applaud it because it has cool action scenes and it is realistic.

they all had the same Alfred and Commissioner Gordon and apparently Schumacher's next batman film 'Batman Triumphant' would've featured the Scarecrow and Harley Quinn as its villains, with a possible hallucinatory appearance by Jack Nicholson as the Joker.

The Batman is one of, if not THE, greatest literary character of our times.
FUCK YOU for thinking all's been done and said with and about the character. You are a small-minded asshat with an even smaller cock who probably thinks Power Rangers or Marvel Comics are great.
FUCK YOU!!!! The Batman character will outlive your twisted, inbred offspring by CENTURIES! That's right, you shit for brains, douchebag, cocksucking, cum-swilling ass-stain, you are NOTHING and The Batman is EVERYTHING!!!!!
SO SHUT THE FUCK UP AND NEVER POST AGAIN YOU BLEEDING PUSSY FAGGOT DOUCHE HEAD COCK HUNGRY CUNT!!!!!11

Batman can't exist in the same universe as Superman (well, he's said that in the past, I don't know what his current stance is given his recent involvement with Supes). I mean I get the dark and gritty vs. bright and shiny part of it. But I believe that Nolan has said that his Batman had to have come first (couldn't have gotten the superhero idea from anyone else). Thing is... his Batman (well any Batman, really) isn't a superhero (he's a very smart vigilante with some damn fine morals and a large bank account (which is awesome, just not 'super')) , and besides who is going to look at Superman and go, "Hey see that guy flying around, there's an urban myth in my city that may or may not exist that totally ripped this guy off." If it's just a matter of not WANTING them to exist in the same universe, then fine, but I see no reason that they can't.

seriously, was it necessary for the first 65 talkback posts to be variations on the same riff over the typo? yeah, we get it, Beaks made a careless typo and that makes the site look bad. that doesn't necessitate 65 bitter, witless fuckheads bitching and moaning about it rather than ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT THE PROPOSED FILM GETTING A RELEASE DATE. god, its becoming way too frequent that I click on the talkbacks looking for a forum discussion of a topic and end up swearing to myself that i'll never come to this site again because there's so many fucking assholes paroling around. fortunately, there are still about 5% of you whose comments are intelligent and worth reading.

The first one was called "Batman Begins" the Second one was The "Dark Knight" the final film will be it's own title. You'll see. No "Shadow" this or "Returns" that. No this if the final film. It is "Batman". You know this to be true.

I'm posting again motherfucker. What are you gonna do about it?Now, there's nothing wrong with a little enthusiasm for Batman but you definetly have some kind of mental disorder. It may be lack of stimuli because you've been chained up in your basement like Ellen Page in "An American Crime".<p>
It might be because you're just a drooling, knuckle-dragging waterhead who's been forced to suck your Dad's cock one decade too many. I suspect the latter. You need help kid. First of all, try and remember that Batman is a fictional character. He doesn't exist in what we call "reality", okay? Do you know what reality is?

....Michael Keaton. Don't ask me what part he would play, because I have no idea. But my gut tells me this is the last Batman movie Nolan and Bale will do together. It would be cool (in my mind) if Keaton had a part in this one (big or small).

I would put this is so much more eloquently but i won' mince words...if you re even remotely trying to knock this movie you can eat dick. All the dicks in fact; and just as you've thought you could consume no more cockmeat...you will eat more. The Dark Knight was amazing. I'm incredibly hard on movies as far as being critical and I tell you that the Dark Knight is cinematic genius. A third in Nolans quite capable directorial hands will be just as perfect, possibly more so. Naysayers, eat cock.

and I've had a few. Seriously though, I once thought my appreciation of things "genre", or whatever term is better suited, gave me a sense of connection with people who had a mutual appreciation of the same things. Now I get the sense of a bunch of unhappy, sacks of shit who love the way their words look. I'm sure they love the sound of their own voices, but this is a visual forum, so I'll stick with loving the way the words look. I digress. It honestly seems like some of you will never be pleased. You would think that anything that brought about the venom that many here spew, would lose it's value, and you'd give up. Maybe play sports. Date a girl. Get some sun. Not the case. Always here. Always bitching, always talking shit. Armchair quarterbacks. I'm reminded of an old axiom about opinions and assholes.

maroni is still on the street because change doesn't happen overnight and no D.A. has a magic wand that makes mob lawyers go away. and the police would need to keep the joker locked up before dent could do anything with him. dent was not jesus...but in a city like gotham he was a great weapon against organized crime.<p>and i did answer the question as to why batman and gordon would cover up dent's actions...because batman is trying to treat the cause of corruption in gotham and not just its symptoms. gotham still needs batman...but it also has the idea that harvey dent is a heroic martyr. now i'm not saying that this cover-up is heroic and i'm not sure that i would say that nolan is making that claim either, as the story is not concluded yet and we have yet to see where batman and gordon's pact will take them and the city. i didn't find the screenplay confusing or cluttered. the message to me was very clear, so i'll have to respectfully disagree with you on that. batman is gotham's hero...but he doesn't require the public to acknowledge that. he will do what is necessary (except killing) for the greater good.

Bottom line is... it's Nolan's call. He went opposite end of the spectrum with Heath Ledger as The (new) Joker. I expect he will do the same with The new Riddler. Pearce could do wonders with the role.<P>BTW, whoever mentioned Anne Hathaway as Catwoman... damn skippy on that call. She'd be great.

"now i'm not saying that this cover-up is heroic and i'm not sure that i would say that nolan is making that claim either, as the story is not concluded yet and we have yet to see where batman and gordon's pact will take them and the city."<p>
Hey, I can hardly wait to see where this story goes, too, because as it stands, it makes Batman look like a moron.<p>
See, he's on the run now, and if Bruce Wayne is actually caught, convicted and sent to prison, he'll be having to watch his back in the showers because HE'S COVERING FOR THE JOKER'S CRIMES. No shit: what Dent turned into is entirely due to what the Joker did to him, so effectively, Batman's making his job of fighting crime ten times harder and also seeing to it that a criminal nut doesn't answer for his own excesses.<p>
Nolan may have helped create the first retarded superhero.

There's GOT to be a love interest though they can't repeat what Burton did in Returns with Catwoman. Talia al Ghul would be much better because she's not been in the films so far, it would feel much more specific to Nolan's universe rather than Catwoman just for the sake of everyone knowing Catwoman.

But if they MUST have the Joker in, how about a supervillain team-up with the Penguin, Catwoman and the Riddler? They can call themselves United Underworld. I can't believe no one's thought of this before.

His appearance in INCEPTION is a dead giveaway (as Neosamurai85 said above), as is Nolan's abrupt change of attitude towards a BATMAN 3 (seems like only yesterday he was moaning that it might never happen)...musta liked the THIRD ROCK kid's approach. That they're so confidently announcing a release date also indicates that the original screenplay Goyer/Nolan hinted at (featuring the Joker's return) is in play.<p>
Other theories: Talia Al Ghul is a more Nolan-esque bad girl than Catwoman...also more logical, given her Dad's appearance in BATMAN BEGINS. But DC must be dying to reform the kitty-girl after the shitstain that was CATWOMAN, so don't be surprised if the studio prevails. I'm wagering that Talia would be played by an Asian actress (Neeson "went native" in Asia), so watch for any announcements in that vein. Lucy Liu, maybe.<p>
I don't think Two-Face is actually dead, so there's another baddie right there, as long as Aaron Eckhart doesn't get too demanding about his salary and gets written out. Scarecrow's still kicking, and if the Joker and Two-Face are cooling their heels in Arkham, then expect Dr. Crane to tag along. In fact, expect A LOT of company in the villain bandwagon...might be much of the familiar mug's gallery from the comic, given that TDK wiped out all the "normal" criminals and the Joker demonstrated the effectiveness of putting on a costume to scare the shit out of everybody. Penguin, Riddler, Mad Hatter, etc, but in smaller roles within the big picture...they're just there to show how costumed villainy has gotten out of hand, now that Bats is in hiding.<p>
Quick storyline concept...Talia breaks Mr. J and Co. out of Arkham (perhaps with the aid of a Dr. Quinzel) to carry out the League Of Shadows goal of stirring up some serious shit that her dad didn't complete. Also, to avenge his "murder" by Batman. A bitter war ensues as the "new" villains (Penguin, et al) battle them when they hit the streets. So, Gotham's begging Batman to return, he makes a booty call on Talia at some point, maybe he adopts a kid named Grayson or gets assistance from Gordon's daughter, blah blah blah. You can see where it goes from there.<p>
Hope this time TeamNolan can get the basics of money-laundering down.

I liked TDK (I give it a good solid B+) much more than a lot of people on this TB, but c'mon. People do have legitimate criticism towards the ending with Batman taking blame for Harvey's crimes. It was a very simplistic, melodramatic (in a negative sense) grasp at making the film "serious." <P>
Yes, he is "The Dark Knight" because he is willing to do things and become things others cannot, because he represents something different than Dent. Great. Some people like a sermon, other people like to be shown something instead of told it. <P>
As a super-hero action movie The Dark Knight rocks (except for the fight scenes - Nolan can improve on those by next movie) but as a serious crime movie, it isn't no where near LA Confidential, Chinatown, The French Connection or Un Prophete.

We can see that a lot of the villains and storylines suggested won't work. Nolan is trying to get away from Batman as a superhero and taking him back to his Pulp roots (but without using a gun or killing). So a lot of the modern villains won't work because, in short, they are just to much comic book super-villains and not arch criminals like his Golden Age foes were. <P>
Plus there is one villain left over that Batman has had just as much a relationship and associated with as the Joker. Someone who has been around just as long as the Joker (exactly, since they both appeared in Batman #1 together). And that is Catwoman. <P>
If TDK explored Batman's relationship with the Joker, then the only major character (besides Robin) who's relationship with Batman hasn't been explored is Catwoman's. No I bet Catwoman will be one of the villains in the next movie. <p>
And the fucking Penguin better be as well.

I can't tell if you're being facetious when you say it's "a nice way to go", but rest assured, the mysteriousness of my Riddler's motivations is part of the story. I do reveal it eventually and, suffice it to say, it's not that he fell into a vat of riddles.

Not only to save the reputation of Dent but also to enhance his own rep: now the criminals will really fear him. Beofre the criminals were "getting wise to his act": they knew that he wasn't a killer. But now, with the perception that Batman IS a killer, well, his rep and street-cred are through the roof! (also, wasn't Bats taking the cred for ALL of Harvey's victims, too? Now they'll REALLY fear him!)

That is just a side effect of what happened. No where in the movie or Nolan's script does it say or suggest that was one of the motives for him taking the blame for Harvey's crimes. <p>
So, yeah, maybe one of the consequences of him taking blame is that criminals will fear him again, but that wasn't the motivation why he did it.

Yeah, pretty contrived and Dent should've died with him. Also, if you'll notice at the beginning of the scene, when Marconi gets into the parked car, after he closes the door and sits in his seat, the car is suddenly going 50 MPH. A necessary "flub"; why else would Marconi stay in the car? (or not raise holy hell about Dent being in the car with a gun?)

Dent has his seat belt out. He takes a moment to put it on before shooting the driver in the back of the head. Maroni never had a chance to put his belt on. <P>
Let that be a listen to all of you about buckling up. <P>
Plus, I believe you can excuse the driver suddenly going 50 because we don't know what instructions Dent gave him earlier. He is literally being held hostage by a pistol to the back of the head when he pulls up to pick up Maroni.

Theoretically, The Joker wouldn't had work in a Nolan Batman movie. A vilain that dresses as a clow? How could you take that seriously? And yet, in THE DARK KNIGHT, we took him very, very seriously. So, i really believe that in the Nolans hands, they could make Catwoman work, and even make her very dramatic.

Interesting link. But check out this recently found, early footage of what would later become Heath Ledger's Joker. Man, his smile just chills the shit out of me...<p>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYU7oG2V7uc

Not Batman 3. Nolanman aren't the first Batman movies to come out, thanks pal. How often do you get up after taking a shit and just walk around with your pants down and a piece of shit hanging out your anus?

I'm hedging my bets on good ol' studio greed. Works nearly every time. TDK was one of the few times that a sequel overtook its predecessor, and the Joker's pull is the main reason...same as it was with Burton's first BATMAN.<p>
Something about weird-ass clowns hits the mark with people, go figure. Explains how THESE guys have kept their act up so long:<p>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7WXoMp8Ews

So it was a masterpiece because the movie-going public pumped billions of dollars into it and kept it at #1? And rbatty....you seem a little too nostalgic about all the testosterone pumping and oozing off the screen during the Dark Knight. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Let BurnHollywood write the third Batman screenplay. Maybe he can actually bring back the real Dark Knight detective...and the damned Batcave!

the most logical thing for the studio to do is to milk the Joker character even if the actor who performed it so brilliantly is dead.<br /><p>Its like when Hollywood resurrected and modernized the ST TOS characters with new actors,because they knew that they are very iconic and the best bait to attract fans.The same applies with Joker.this new version of Joker at this point of time is very iconic and very lovable to the general audience.If the studio can find an actor who can fill Ledger's shoes,then you can bet that the main villain of Batman 3 will be the Joker.

car crashes.Marconi's limo was turned over,its roof was crashed also not only the front or the side part of the car.So unless the backseat had airbags,both Marconi and 2Face should have died.Yet again its one of those damn things in the movie which dont make any sense but they are put there for coolness and convenience without any second thought.<br /><p>And although i dont mind in TDK exaggerated things like Batman falling from a skyscraper with a woman,and they both survive,after all its a super-hero movie,but the scene with the bus leaving the bank and the scene with the crashed limo,stand out as so illogical that its hard for me not to criticize them.

You see things like that bother me even less than things like how Batman acts (man, was he kind of whiny and willing to give up something he worked years to achieve so quickly). <P>
It is just a rationalization in my own head, but I see it as Two-Face so not giving a fuck about his own life so much and wanting to kill Sal but still obeying his rules of the coin flip, he is willing to take a risk in dying in a car crash just to kill him. So, yeah, he probably has just as much chance of dying in the crash as Sal at that moment except he luckily has his seat belt on to give him a slight edge, and he is crazy enough to take that risk. I mean, the guy is missing half his face so it isn't like he is worried about getting disfigured. <P>
And like I said, stuff like that bothers me less than the over sentimentality in the film. Between this and the constant teary-eyed look in LOTR, modern movies seem to think heroes have to wear their hearts on their sleeves, or cowls.

if they tell him to recast the Joker he will say orly? O>K> cool lets recast the Joker and you can recast the director see how that works out for you? Ahem. Well Mr. Nolan it was just a suggestion, what were you saying about the Riddler again?

to crash the limo.that scene correctly presents his emotional state at that point of the movie.my problem is that he survived a car crash totally uninjured while the other guy was killed,all that because he wore seat-bet.<br /><p>If we were talking about an 80s action flick with Stallone,we might have forgiven such an unrealistic scene (and 20 years later maybe laugh at it) but since TDK is supposed to be the first movie to make such a realistic world where super-heroes (without super-powers) can be part of it,then yeah such things do bug.<br /><p>You know what would have been more dramatic imho? that Dent survives the accident but he is very wounded.He knows that he is going to die but he is determined to complete his revenge.I think that would have changed entirely the dramatic execution and the outcome of the last scene where Dent has Gordons family hostage.<br /><p>And maybe maybe Batman didnt have to kill him at the end.Because if you think about it,thats what Batman with his moral code did,even without planing it: he killed the future husband of his ex-girlfriend and the savior of GC,while 10m before that he spared the life of a serial killer who was ultimately responsible for everything.

Like I said, I think it basically is something you can suspend disbelief about or not. Him surviving unhurt in the crash didn't bother me, but it bothered you. Everyone has their own thresh hold. <P>
Me, I'm bothered that he fired an f'ing maching gun in a mall while riding the batpod. Sorry, but what is your backstop Batman? Because bullet's keep going. That was beyond just reckless, that was homicidal IMO.

In the Nolan reality-when-convenient Batman universe I think The Penguin would be his best choice. I also would love to see his take on him. BTW the TDK was very overrated and crashed to a standstill when ledger was offscreen. The boat bit, the money laundering, the Chinese stuff, and when that crap wasnt happening we got the longest Law and order episode ever. I liked the movie but I feel geeks have to gush over it to keep their geek cards from being confiscated.

is because he's been done already. I'm thinking they might want to go with someone more obscure as the main villain to keep it fresh, like BB. Or not. I'm fine with the Penguin. can't wait to hear more info on this movie

al quada double agent going around planting bombs and blaming the taliban and the tea party but leaving riddles to entrap Batman so they can blame him because Batman registered as an independant and likes to write conspiracy theories on the internet like 9/11 was an inside job infowars.com

batman a moron? a retard?<p>no.<p>and here's why:joker covered up his own involvement with what happened to dent. maroni's men including GCPD detectives are implicated in what happened to dent and rachel. even if dent had lived to tell his side, "the joker gave me some speech about chaos..." is never going to fly in court. they also can't pin it on him for giving the locations of dent and rachel to batman because he is essentially an outlaw vigilante civilian that beat that confession out of joker. but that's ok...joker's going away for what they can pin on him. you know, blowing up a hospital, everything that happened in the pruitt building, the ferries...not to mention killing a guy on tape. batman is trying to do much more than just "fight crime".

Didn't see the question, but I would be happy to answer. <P>
I think the Penguin is already a natural for the Nolan universe. Nolan doesn't like super-villains (Mr. Freeze, Clayface, Bane, Man-Bat) he likes Arch-Criminals. Guys who look like they could be from the Dick Tracy strip. The Joker, Two-Face fit that mold. So does The Penguin. <P>
Secondly, Nolan likes old noirs and gangster movies. Well The Penguin is very much like Sydney Greenstreet from the Maltese Falcon or Edward G. Robinson from Key Largo. He fits in with Nolan's version of Batman as a kind of Noirish/Pulp hero. Everything about the Penguin can be rationalized and explained:
<p> The Penguin is a nickname like gangsters/criminals have, like Tony the Ant, Jimmy the Gent or Murray the Camel Humphreys. He is called this because he walks with a penguin-like waddle, which is why he has an umbrella as a cane (kind of like how some people use a putter). He isn’t always dressed in a tux, just for special occasions (just like how Sherlock Holmes in the old movie wasn't always in the deerstalker cap and cloak, only when out in the English countryside, or how Bond isn't always in a tuxedo himself even though that is the iconic image of him) but he is an impeccable dresser. All of this fits with the GA Penguin and works with Nolan’s universe. <P>
If I was going to make the Penguin work in Nolan’s universe, I would also discard everything about him post 1980. Sorry, but no Iceberg Lounge, no arms dealer, or freak with flippers. And his name isn’t Oswald Cobblepot (that was a 1980-something invention, and one of the worst moves ever to saddle him with such a lame name). No, I would do what Nolan and his brother did with the Joker, go back to his first appearances in the Golden Age. <p>
Nolan basically took the Joker’s fist appearance in Batman #1 and adapted it into a movie (if you look at that comic and TDK you will every major beat in the comic book with the Joker was translated into the movie). He has stated he likes how the characters were first portrayed in the Golden Age (Joker, Batman and Two-Face) and wants to tap into those ideas. Well, if you look at the Penguin’s first appearances in the GA, he is an incredibly interesting character. <P>
When the Penguin first appeared, he was this funny looking guy in a tux who soon shows his true colors –that he is a ruthless criminal. He quickly joins the local mob and then kills the leader and takes it over. He then runs into trouble with Batman so what does he do? Frames him for a crime because no one is going to suspect respected art collector Mr. Boniface (the Penguin’s original name). <p>
At the end of the story, the Caped Crusader clears his name but in unable to capture the Penguin because he escapes, something no other villain did. Joker was always either captured or had the comic book trope “the mysterious death” while Catwoman was basically allowed to escape by a sympathetic Batman. But the Penguin does it FIVE TIMES IN A ROW, proving he is smarter than Batman.
<p> He also was the first villain to profit from a crime (the Penguin shows up in another story with the profits from his last caper, showing that the Penguin is the rare villain who “Crime Does Pay”) and while not as blood thirsty as the Joker, was one of the few repeating villains who would kill. In fact, he is also the only villain who get’s away with murder – he kills a man in one issue and makes it look like he dies of natural causes, and no one – not even the Dynamic Duo – know he is the culprit. <P>
I see the Penguin as the anti-Joker. Where the Joker was loud and attention grabbing, like a terrorist, the Penguin works in secret, like a corrupt politician or businessman. He doesn’t want people to know that he is the one responsible (he is like Keyser Soze, “The greatest trick that the Devil pulled was making us believe he didn’t exist”). Where the Joker wanted to prove there is no order in the universe and is the ultimate nihilist, the Penguin is all about order and working within the system. Remember when The Joker talked about the Plan in the hospital and said that “if a gangbanger gets shot or a bunch of soldier’s die no one cares”? The Penguin would say “exactly.” He banks on that. He can kill and murder and rob and run Gotham from behind the scenes, and as long as he doesn’t make it an “inconvenience” for Gotham and it’s citizens he knows they will turn a blind eye. That is why if he does have to kill a citizen, he makes it look like an accident (like he did in Detective Comics number 67, where he made it look like a man died from psittacosis). <P>
And to me that is scary. Everyone is obviously scared of a guy like the Joker, but the reason you really need a Batman is to go after the people no one suspects of being criminals. Guys who kill with impunity and no one even thinks about wondering if a crime was committed. Guys like the Penguin. <p>
To use a movie anology, remember LA Confidential? Well, the Joker would have just done the Nite-Owl Massacre. The Penguin would have done the coverup and got away with it if it wasn’t for Rollo Tomasi, er, I mean Batman.

...as usual. Btw would the post-1980 rule include TAS too? Having Penguin would at least make more sense to tie in to with all the mob fetish in these movies since he can play them like a puppeteer whihc would make more sense than what they tried with Joker "i'm crazy and just randomly killed one of your guys... so follow me!"

Anything post 80s can be used, including TAS, as long as it doesn't contradict or go against what Bill Finger and Bob Kane were doing when they originally made the character in 1941. Kind of like how Nolan and co. used elements of The Killing Joke and Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on a Serious Earth that didn't contradict Finger and Kane's original version of the Joker (like no Red Hood or origin for him).

That'd be great, though he's a bit old now. He could put Gordon's head in a vice: " Give me the fucking name of that batsuit wearing freak, ya motherfuckering mick!!!". Philip Seymour Hoffman is more likely, though.<p>I always thought it was puzzling that Nolan dismissed The Penguin as not fitting into his 'realistic' batman universe, when he's exactly the type of villain that would, like Continetalop detailed above. He would merely be a gun-runner or mob enforcer type wih a penchant for eccentric clothing (monacles, clawhammer coats and top hats). He'd also work better as a henchman type, rather than the main villain.

The Penguin serves no man Turd! He is the Capo di tutti capi of Gotham! <P>
But seriously, I think he could be a great main villain. Like I said above, he doesn't have to wear the tux and top hat all the time, just one scene. Normally he wears a real expensive suit. The reason he was always in a tux and top hat in his original appearances is that was the attire of well dressed gentlemen of the 1940s (just watch "Tales of Manhattan"). Well times change and so can the Penguin's clothes. Besides, what he wore was never his costume but just his style, so he doesn't have to be so locked in his iconic appearance all the time (same thing with Sherlock Holmes or James Bond). He only has to wear it once or twice. <P>
And Penguin would never use such language - he is like Paul Castellano or Murray Humphreys who always acted with a veneer of respectability and class.

"joker covered up his own involvement with what happened to dent. maroni's men including GCPD detectives are implicated in what happened to dent and rachel. even if dent had lived to tell his side, "the joker gave me some speech about chaos..." is never going to fly in court."<p>
So he's trashed his reputation for a hood and some crooked cops...who were, off-the-record, working for the Joker. Vast improvement.<p>
And Zardoz indirectly brought up another issue: Batman has a strict code about not killing criminals, remember? So now he's chucking that valorous credo and allowing the perception to get out that he's a killer vigilante.<p>
WTF.

no. he sacrificed his reputation to
save dent's reputation and preserve the morale of the city.<p>batman is already performing criminal acts as a vigilante. if the murders are pinned on him it's not nearly as shocking as those same acts being done by a district attorney who is one of the most successful in the history of gotham in taking down the mob. the mob and their lawyers would have a valuable weapon in fighting the indictments leveled against them by dent.<p>as corrupt as it already was it wouldn't take the citizens of gotham long to completely write off the justice system in their city upon finding out that their star D.A. had gone on a vengeful rampage. and while a few might sympathize, the victim card would not carry him far. real life tabloids are a testament of how quickly and easily people love to tear down those they once celebrated, which pours more cynicism and apathy into the ether.<p>and batman is still upholding his code. he hasn't killed anyone directly. batman is not overtly concerned with how the public perceives him in the scope of his larger mission to restore a spirit of optimism to gotham. and again, we'll see how that plays out in part 3.

Actually, seatbetls are also very good in saving drivers and passsengers from car crash roll-overs. Among many, it was the swedish who put that to the test repeatedly for decades,a nd the end result is always the same: even with airbags, seatbels are still the safest cars passive safety protection. And really, since you are norwegian (if i'm not mistaken) i'm suprprised you would think so ill of the safety of seatbelts, considering the results from the car crashes tests done by your neighbours the swedish. Seatbelts indeed save lives, even from roll-overs.

... seatbelts ar enot particulary well like,d but it's true, even with modern airbag technology, seatbelts are still the best safety device in a car. So, yeah, Harvey Dent could and would survive from a roll over like what killed Falconio in THE DARK KNIGHT and leave the car pretty much unscratched.

But if he is Nolan-ized, then we'll have Batman vs. the mob and crooked businessmen, Part 2. I know it's such a fine and scary line to walk, to show realistic villains, but at the same time too realistic= boring. Someone else mentioned it, we can watch Law and Order on TV. But nobody wants to stray even the slightest bit back into Schumacher Cheese Camp. Who could blame them? Looking back, I think Nolan did great with The Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul, two villains I never paid much attention to as a kid. There's gotta be some other second or third tier villains that could prove movie-worthy.

I want Nolan to use the Penguin to bring him back from the horrible obscurity the character has fallen into. Here was a character who once fought with the Joker over who was Batman's greatest and most dangerous foe - and it was a close race. Now thanks to bad writing and Burton's horrible characterization he has become a joke in the Batman universe. <P>
Personally I think he can be shown over the top and even slightly campy. The Penguin can appear funny and silly because that is the point of the character: looks are deceiving. He is like Bruce Wayne in some ways who puts on the act of spoiled, bored billionaire so no one suspects him of being Batman. Well the Penguin does that too, except once in a while the mask drops ever so slightly and you can see the psychotic, evil bastard underneath the smiling funny little fat guy who quotes Keats and raises pidgeons. <p>

Good points have been made by the pro Penguin camp IMHO -- agreed that story, the actor, and costume design will be determining factors.<p>Add the unique Nolan take on things and Penguin would be an really exciting villain if Nolan and co. go in that direction.

franchise ffs.and what we have got until now: a ninja fighting ninjas and the mafia in the first movie,and in the sequel a ninja fighting dogs,the swat team,the mafia and 2 lunatics.
<p>This thing is already becoming repetitive and it will be totally boring if Nolan uses the same formula of mafia-style,grounded to earth baddies in his next film.
<p>I understand what kind of universe Nolan tries to establish in his franchise,but his villains until now,they dont pose a real threat to him,neither physically not intellectually with the exception ofc Joker.
<p>And since they dont pose a threat,they dont cause excitement when Batman is battling them.Its not that Nolan does not know to direct action sequences,its that there is no need to make cool action scenes since the villains are very ordinary humans and they dont create a real challenge for batman to overcome.
<p>Where is the Batman who kicked Darkseid (and Supermans) butt? Where is the Batman who made super-genius Lex Luthor his bitch? I only see fragments of this Batman in Nolan's movies,especially in TDK he is less 'super'-heroic and master-detective than he was in BB.I mean the guy used the deus-ex machina trapped cellphones to find Joker and he just had to beat his dogs ffs.
<p>thats why i dont want one more mafioso-style villain in Batman3 like the Penguin.He should have him as the underboss villain in TDK which would have been even cooler.But since we got a lot of typical crime-drama underwold villains how about something different mr Nolan,something a bit more heroic,a bit more to the Batman's true level of skills? a genius Riddler who would be Bat's intellectual rival and Bane who would be his physical match.I prefer that than an under-boss with the nicname Penguin because he is dressed and walking like a "penguin".

The Penguin isn't an under-boss. He is THE boss. But better yet, he is the boss no one knows about. He is the power behind the throne, the guy who lets someone else get the title of head of the family or crime lord while he manipulates and controls things from the sideline. <P>
Secondly, the Penguin is a genius. Think about it. If a member of Gotham's Major Crimes Unit went to Gordon's office and told him that they have just gotten info that a guy they have never heard of before who has no criminal record is now controlling all of Gotham's underworld and knocking off mob bosses who disagree with him and they didn't have a clue about that until now, and then showed Gordon a photo of a funny looking guy who looks nothing like a gangster, Gordon's going to at first think the guy is joking. His second thought will be "if this guy isn't joking, how fucking smart is this Penguin character to do all of this with out us or Batman even knowing about it until now, and we still have no evidence to connect him?" THAT is a challenge for the supposed "World's Greatest Detective." <P>
Third thing, we just went through a loud and attention grabbing villain. Now Batman is on the run and being hunted by the cops. Any loud costume weary villain is going to cause the cops to call of their manhunt because an obvious bigger threat has appeared. But if you have a villain who doesn't appear villainous, who doesn't want to grab the headlines or even be known, then Batman is going to have a hard time stopping him when he still has Gordon and the cops on his ass. Hell, the police are going to go out to protect an upstanding individual like Mr. Boniface (fuck if I will call him Cobblepot) against an insane, murderous vigilante like Batman. <P>
Finally, who says the Penguin couldn't have muscle work for him. Villains like Killer Croc, Deadshot and Bane suck on their own because they are not plotters, but they would work as someone's number one enforcer. Think of James Bond: besides facing Blofeld, Goldfinger and Dr. No, Bond also has to face tough Henchmen like Red Grant, Oddjob and Jaws.

He is a Pulp masked crime-fighter, in the same mode as The Shadow. The Spider and The Green Hornet. And Nolan is trying to go back to those roots. <P>
So I respectfully disagree ominus. 2012 should be the Year of the Penguin!

Nolan's Batman movies contribute to Michael Caine's pension fund. As if i couldn't offer any more praises for Nolan's Batman mvoies, they also do that kindess to a great veteran actor. Hell, nolan has even hired him for two non-Batman movies, THE PRESTIGE and INCEPTION. Such kindness to the old pro.

Penguin,regardless of how you describe him,he is just another boss of the underworld.And Batman is fighting organized crime for 2 movies now.
<p>I am now saying that i disagree with what you say.Your ideas are very interesting and i wish Nolan would have used from the start your Penguin as the arch-boss of the underworld,than some generic,stereotypical italian thugs.
<p>BUT as i said Batman is fighting the organized crime for 2 movies now.Can we move on? Can we get some other,refreshing kind of threat this time? something a bit more super-heroic maybe?
<p>i already gave the example of the Riddler/Bane duo.intellect and muscles.The ideas are unlimited especially when the new movie can follow entirely new routes: BB was an origin movie with a james bond doomsday machine finale.The second was a crime-drama movie with a bit of psycho-social commentary.Make Batman 3 a new genre movie.
<p>Make it a serial-killer/conspiracy movie for example.Someone or something is murdering the citizens during the nights.its like an animal has cut them with its teeth and claws.Police is unable to discover the killer and Batman is their only hope although he is on the run from them.Batman uses serious detective work (at last) and discovers that the killer is a mutant man,called Croc.He kills or captures Croc and from there he starts discovering that Croc's killings were a part of a greater plan,he starts finding out pieces of a bigger plan,of a conspiracy which threats the foundations of his beloved city,a conspiracy that goes back to his parents when they were alive.maybe behind this conspiracy is black mask,the riddler,the penguin,maybe even lex luthor,why not.
<p>Anyway what i am trying to say is that Nolan should not reuse the same forumal of mafioso or doomsday devices again.The next batman movie should be a totally different genre, a film-noir,a detective genre,a conspiracy noir,any other story that fits Batman's universe.thats all.

have you seen Ripley's believe it or not? or documentaries with strange cases of people who were not born normal? you do know about the freak circus shows and that the elephant man was real?<br /><p>come on asi,we get a lunatic dressed up as a scarecrow which poisons the people with a weird gas which make them see monsters.we have a machine which turns water into steam.we have a man who jumps from a skyscraper and he survives saving a woman from a free fall.a big truck rolling over 180 degrees.a tank destroying half the city to capture someone while nobody gets hurt.a machine which controls bats.a motorcycle being part of a tank.a machine which controls all the cellphones of a city and you can use them as sonar radars.and so on.<br /><p>i am sorry but a baby born as a freak,an accident of nature ,is more plausible than the above things in a 'realistic' universe like Nolans.

along the different comic book eras. The Burtons were the 1940s Batman era, the Shumackers were the 1950s/60s era and the Nolans were the 80s/present era. I admittedly like the fantastical tales of the 50s/60s a lot when he fought villains so colorful they made the Power Rangers rogues gallery appear like a regular Sherlock Holmes badguy.

Even without the camp, i still think if they made some Batman movies in the 70s starring Adam West but a bit more grit and less camp like all the vigilante movies of the day, would have been superb. And only cloth suit, probably the only time a spandex suit was made possible without the slightest hint of gay.

Naw, just joking with you there. I am pushing for the Penguin here, but I seriously doubt I have any pull in him being named the head villain or that another villain couldn’t work. I am mostly here making the case for the Penguin because I want to see him move from Batman’s second and third tier of foes back to being one of his first tier, A-list villains. And I think if Nolan did use him, I am sure his status amongst modern comic book fans would be elevated. <p>
However, while I can understand you growing bored with the organized crime element in the Batman movies, I am politely going to disagree because it doesn’t really bother me. One reason is because Batman, despite being a “super-hero”, is very much part of Detective/Crime fiction, and organized crime is very much part of that genre. Batman’s job is to stop crime, well that includes organized crime (and organized crime does not mean the Italian Mafie, it also includes Outlaw biker gangs, the Russian Mafia, Black street gangs, Latino gangs, Chinese Triads, prison gangs, Mexican drug cartels, etc.). I like that angle and don’t think it has grown tired yet. <P>
The other reason is because I think crime itself can be used as a metaphor for another problem. In BB the main villains represented Al-Queda style international terrorist while Falcone and the gangsters represented an almost quaint kind of urban problem. Compared to the massive body count and terror that al-Queda, I mean the League of Shadows, could inflict they were hardly a threat or even seemed like that big of problem. <P>
TDK was almost a complete metaphor for the occupation of Iraq and the insurgency. The mobsters could be looked at as these former Bath party members who are no match for Batman, Gordon and the cops (the US Army), so they turn to the Joker (Zarqawi and al-Queda of Iraq). So what does the Joker do? He kills people and records it as a message (kind of like chopping someone’s head off on the internet), kills public officials who work with the police, and keeps killing innocents until the police succumbs to his demands (unmask Batman = US leave). Hell, even the attack on the police escort is just a comic book version of an insurgent attack on an Army convoy. <p>
So if the gangsters and arch-criminals can be viewed as metaphors for something else, what could Nolan use them as? Well, WINONA_RYDER’S_PUSSY_JUICE was being facetious, but I do think you can use the Penguin as a metaphor for a post Wall Street crash villain. If BB was about post 9-11 and TDK was about occupation of Iraq, the next one could be about how some of the biggest threats to this country isn’t terrorist or wars overseas, but guys in suits who can manipulate the system to rob you blind and you won’t even know about it. Hell, the Penguin can take over crime in Gotham and then turn it into an efficient organization based on a corporate model and even get “handouts” from the Government at the expense of Gotham’s citizens. <P>
And if people think that sounds boring by itself, let me just remind you that Batman will be hunted by the cops during the movie, so besides facing an empire headed by the Penguin he will also have to face Commissioner Gordon and his police department being ordered by the mayor to take down Batman, so it isn’t like there won’t be plenty of opportunities for action (throw in a secondary villain and you really got some scenes). <p>
Now this might be something you might like ominus, but what I described is definitely up my alley for what I want to see Batman do - become an actual detective who has to take down someone the law cannot touch.

Maybe mutant is the wrong word, but someone who is born with an actual physical deformity fits in perfectly with Nolan's world. Say a big hulking bruiser suffering from ichthyosis: <p>
http://tinyurl.com/2dpx8rl <P>
I could see that fitting in the Nolan universe. Very Dick Tracy-ish.

as it's been stated, in these recent films batman is being brought back to his roots.<p>when bob kane created him i don't think much thought was given to batman's existence in a universe filled with ultra-powerful beings.<p>what i'm getting at is that the reason batman has so many of the abilities that he has in the comics is because writers want it to be that way. there's always some new gadget or skill that he can be given.<p>it's the only way a non-powered character is going to survive in the dc universe. but it is completely arbitrary. his abilities have increased over the years because the writers are fans just like the rest of us and batman is extremely in vogue because people love dark and mysterious characters, and they love underdogs. so writers take an already popular character, pour their own bias for the dark and mysterious underdog by making him a master at whatever the story requires him to be a master of (which ironically removes his underdog status and makes him as implausible as superman) and voila! he can now beat superman, lex luthor and darkseid.

penguin: as it's been discussed at length, there is absolutely no reason that he couldn't work in these movies...none.<p><p>catwoman: if a man that dresses up like a bat can work, so can a woman who dresses up like a cat, but just like batman, it has to be translated the right way to screen. i see her as the escalation of individuals who are inspired by batman to fight crime but do not share his code. maybe she sees herself as a robin hood type..stealing from the rich corrupt and recirculating the money to those that she feels deserve it. maybe she's using the penguin as a fence.<p><p>bane: it would be cool to see someone who is a strategist and could beat batman within an inch of his life (we have yet to see batman really take a beating in these movies). if they're going to use water-vaporizing microwaves and cell phone sonar devices then a guy that uses strength enhancing drugs is not far fetched at all. lose the luchador outfit and cast javier bardem and there you go.<p><p>the riddler: he could be very effective in a world where batman is on the run from the law. he could be a thomas gabriel type from live free or die hard. hacking into various city resources and creating havok but having a compulsion to leave some kind of clue before he makes each move. or maybe he's the mastermind behind all the other villains in the movie..playing the whole city like puppets.<p><p>the joker: if he's in the movie i hope it's in a diminished capacity. we've already seen him and i want to see how nolan translates other characters. but i wouldn't be surprised if we see joseph gordon-levitt at least making an appearance as the joker.<p><p>talia al ghul: if they play by part 3 rules where they try and bring it full circle to the first movie then talia would make perfect sense.<p><p><p>at this point if they want to get joe sixpack in the theatre then they have to realize that big name villains are going to be the draw. it's the only way they're going to be able to compete with the success of TDK. most people are only familiar with the big 4 from the adam west series: joker, penguin, catwoman and the riddler. scarecrow and ra's al ghul worked for BB because by necessity bruce wayne had to be the central focus of the story...it was his origin. not that i'm saying that he shouldn't still be the focus, but i know i'm not alone when i say that a big part of fun in TDK was seeing how the joker was going to be brought to life by nolan and that thrill is proportionate to how high of a profile that the villain has. now a good story is a good story no matter who the villain is, but if they go with a character like black mask, who is even less well known than scarecrow or ra's al ghul before their film debut, then prepare for an abrupt drop in viewership. the big 4 have earned their place...black mask, not so much.

I enjoy and endorse sodomy, socialism, elitism, and abortion. In fact, abortion is a hobby of mine along with my long list of past girlfriends, all of whom were Wiccan, vegan pagans who worshiped the moon, masturbated to drum beats, and consulted tea leaves as to whether or not to shave their pits or bathe.
Because I'm an elitist, liberal fascist, I see all things that are not in agreement with my thinking as stupid, wrong, and beneath me. Of course, I put on the lying face of being "open-minded," but the truth is, I'd put all working-class and religious people in ovens, then keep their children as a slave class.
I'm XEN11. I helped elect Kommodore Obama. I hate goodness and kindness and love evil and so-called "values." I'm the future of this country.
Ask your "God" to help you.

fighting extremes with extremes, are we? are you by chance in the business of making campaign commercials for republicans?<p>while i certainly don't agree with XEN11's attempt to stir up a hornet's nest, your reply is filled with so much propaganda and appeals to spite, fear and motive as to render your argument ineffective to all but the most emotional absolutists.

If Nolan's not on board with doing a Justice League movie, then he needs to fuck off. Let him wrap up his "realistic" vision of Batman, and let DC/Warner move forward with JLA. It's gonna happen after Avengers, no doubt about it. Who is Nolan to decide if Batman should be mingling with other DC super-heroes, huh? Fuck him.

So as to officially diagnose your clear inability to recognize sarcasm.
Truthfully, I'm amazed you're decrying my response which is, as you put it, "filled with propaganda," when XEN11's is also filled with the same.
Could it be you're in the business of the liberal media, i.e., you love double-standards and prefer to make your employers (read: The Democratic Party) look as if they're free of the same partisan lies that soil both sides?

the sarcasm i recognize...i merely address the fact that it sullies your point. and you're right XEN11's post did involve propaganda, but it was a short-winded non-personal jab that was nothing but hot air and surely would have faded in the sea of posts here had it not successfully baited you into an equally tribalist "us vs. them" response. but i'm sure making a point was secondary to just putting another "elitist, liberal fascist" in their place. that's stickin' it to 'em!<p>"Could it be you're in the business of the liberal media, i.e., you love double-standards and prefer to make your employers (read: The Democratic Party) look as if they're free of the same partisan lies that soil both sides?"<p>both sides? really? so conservatives can be elitist fascists too? they aren't above electing candidates that many members of the opposing party despise? members of both parties commit acts of evil, yet consider their values to be the right ones? well, i'm glad you're coming around to that because that sure isn't the impression i got from your response to XEN11. and as far as my affiliations...stick to what you know...which is not anything about me.

we'll see DiCaprio as an obscure villain and the main bad guy (hey, you can go obscure and not worry about box office when Leo is in the role), maybe as Black Mask, and Catwoman/Selina Kyle playing a small role. No idea who Nolan will cast as Catwoman, but I do think we'll see a cameo of some sort from The Joker (be it TV footage of his trial, or a brief scene in prison), and that Joseph Gordon Levitt will jump on it.

Robin Williams would be good as the Penguin... IAN MCSHANE WOULD BE VETTER...BETTER! Supercast... Ian McShane/Penguin, Michael Emerson/Riddler, Robin Williams/Batman...no...Robin Williams/The Ventriloquist and Scarface. Plot could be about Penguin vs. Scarface fighting over the power vacuum in Gotham. Riddler comes in in a Sanjuro sort of way play each against the other, presenting himself as an ally to the dark knight... when in fact he is hired by Gotham Metro to capture and stop the Batman. You could also have some reflection in dialogue by Bruce Wayne talking about how the Joker warned him that he would eventually be hunted down by those he protected. That would be an awesome movie.